Tools for the investigation of adverse events: scoping review

2Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To map, in the literature, the risk management tools aimed at investigating health adverse events. Method: Scoping review according to the Joanna Brigss Institute, with acronym PCC (Population: hospitalized patients, Concept: tools for the investigation of adverse events, and Context: health institutions) carried out in MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, LILACS, Scopus, CINAHL, and gray literature. Results: The search totaled 825 scientific productions, 31 of which met the objective of the study, which consisted of 27 scientific articles and 4 expert consensus. It was possible to carry out a synthesis of the necessary steps for the investigation of adverse events and use of the tools according to the extent of damage. Conclusion: The practice of investigating adverse events should be guided by a thorough understanding of contributing factors, a fair culture, and the involvement of senior leadership.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

de Mello, L. R. G., Christovam, B. P., Moreira, A. P. A., de Moraes, E. B., Paes, G. O., & Prates, C. G. (2022). Tools for the investigation of adverse events: scoping review. Revista Da Escola de Enfermagem, 56. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2021-0519EN

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free